Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JLS (X Factor Group)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. — Aitias // discussion 13:54, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

JLS (X Factor Group)[edit]

JLS (X Factor Group) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Creation of a standalone article for JLS is both premature and unneccessary: premature because they are currently only known for their involvement in the X Factor and WP:BIO1E applies, and unneccessary because a bio already exists at List_of_The_X_Factor_finalists_(UK_series_5)#JLS. If they gain independent notability then an article would be appropriate but to assume they will before the event violates WP:CRYSTAL. Ros0709 (talk) 00:06, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

*Speedy redirect to List_of_The_X_Factor_finalists_(UK_series_5)#JLS. Not yet notable enough for their own article! JS (chat) 00:10, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What about just Jack the Lad Swing with a link to it on the JLS DAB page? Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 22:34, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me! JS (chat) 22:38, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, sounds good to me as well. Pyrrhus16 (talk) 15:27, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 19:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment this AFD was previosuly closed early in what was determined at DRV to be a good faith, but nonetheless an improper WP:NAC. The discussion has been reopened. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 19:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - JLS have won an Urban Music Award, are notable under Criterion 9 of WP:MUSICBIO and are about to be signed to record deal with Simon Cowell [1]. Pyrrhus16 (talk) 19:17, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect (per my original nomination). The AfD for Eoghan Quigg noted that WP:MUSICBIO attributes notability to acts "placed" in a music contest. At the time I commented that this probably blew away the deletion rationale (which was the same as this one). But there is certainly plenty of room for doubt. What exactly does "placed" mean? Is this policy supposed to override WP:BIO1E or is it itself overridden? And although in the final week of the contest JLS finished higher than E.Q., over the course of the contest, E.Q. generally finished ahead of JLS so you could argue that E.Q. "placed" more highly. And, of course, the AfD for E.Q. was far from clear-cut and the closing admin had a tough call to make - another admin may not have made the same decision. So whereas I agree this AfD was rightly re-opened, I don't think the fact that the AfD for E.Q. closed as keep is, in itself, any reason why this one should. Right now, everything notable about JLS is attributable to the X Factor and IMO a separate article is not warranted. Any non-keep closure should, of course, be without prejudice to recreation if that changes - it probably will in future, but that is irrelevant now. Ros0709 (talk) 21:07, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ros, no one here has !voted keep because of Eoghan Quigg. We have !voted keep because JLS are an award winning group that were placed in a TV talent show. They clearly pass WP:MUSIC. Also, since this AfD nomination was made, the article has been massively improved and sourced. JS (chat) 21:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are correct. The DRV which resulted in this reopening did follow on from, and make heavy reference, to the E.Q. AfD (see Talk:Eoghan Quigg) - but I agree this immediate discussion has not done so - and should stand or fall on its own. I maintain that - at present - JLS and X Factor are too closely connected to separate, and the article itself makes this quite clear. Ros0709 (talk) 21:55, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Except that an Urban Music Award is not a "major" award on a par with the Grammys, as WP:MUSIC requires. 212.56.100.48 (talk) 16:30, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well thats your opinion. In any case, they still pass WP:MUSIC per no. 9 - "Has won or placed in a major music competition" JS (chat) 21:16, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep - I don't know much about this group and have somewhat stumbled upon this but if what the above says is true, and they have placed in a TV talent show and won an award, policy says this definitely has to stay. If it helps any further see ChildLine Concert - they apparently performed here too, even though the article says not due to lack of update on clear referencing (yet if you check the venue it will tell you otherwise.) --➨Candlewicke  :) Sign/Talk 11:40, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep- Eoghan Quiggs article was kept due to his place in the competition and as JLS reached a higher position, there article should also be kept. And 3 of the members of the band have been famous before. They have also won an Award (the band together) for their music. 86.161.253.214 (talk) 15:06, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - But re-evaluate at a later date. - On one hand, it could be argued that a great many acts who don't win in an X factor final drop out of the public eye relatively quickly. On the other hand, if memory serves me correctly, the terms the X factor live show performers agree to state that second and third place are given lesser contracts with Syco Music (was revealed when the terms were leaked this year). If I'm right about that, I would argue that the record deal plus the recognition they receive through the show should result on the article being kept. we can only determine Notability in the present tense, since wikipedia is not a crystal ball. It's better to let a situation like this - which, lest we forget, is not even 2 weeks old - develop before re-evaluating it where the question of notability is concerned, as opposed to deleting it before notability can really establish or in this case, diminish itself. as an aside, if this doesn't meet notability standard, surely it should be taken into consideration that even those who win it: e.g., Steve Brookstein and , to perhaps a lesser degree, Shayne Ward, are no longer notable in the musical field?

78.148.31.81 (talk) 07:42, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/JLS_(X_Factor_Group)&oldid=1144625587"